Are We Politicians or Citizens?

[Pierre.Suave]

Howard Zinn (from truthout)

http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/032607J.shtml

<snip>

As I write this, Congress is debating timetables for withdrawal from Iraq. In response to the Bush Administration's "surge" of troops, and the Republicans' refusal to limit our occupation, the Democrats are behaving with their customary timidity, proposing withdrawal, but only after a year, or eighteen months. And it seems they expect the anti-war movement to support them.

That was suggested in a recent message from MoveOn, which polled its members on the Democrat proposal, saying that progressives in Congress, "like many of us, don't think the bill goes far enough, but see it as the first concrete step to ending the war."

Ironically, and shockingly, the same bill appropriates $124 billion in more funds to carry the war. It's as if, before the Civil War, abolitionists agreed to postpone the emancipation of the slaves for a year, or two years, or five years, and coupled this with an appropriation of funds to enforce the Fugitive Slave Act.

<snip>

As I see it, he nails it.

[bryant69]

1. It's very easy to support belling the cat

when you aren't the one putting the bell around it's neck.

Bryant
Check it out --> http://politicalcomment.blogspot.com

[Dhalgren]

5. But if you were hired to do exactly that, then you either do it or quit.

" We are not politicians, but citizens. We have no office to hold on to, only our consciences, which insist on telling the truth. That, history suggests, is the most realistic thing a citizen can do."

He says we should, as citizens, accept no compromises that do not seem fair and at least partially beneficial to our purposes. This, to me, sounds reasonable. If the politicians are saying, "We can't do what the people want, because we are afraid we will lose our jobs." Then they should be informed that the opposite is more likely...

[mondo joe]

9. Where did you get what Congress was hired to do?

DU alone didn't elect Congress. Even the slight dem majority includes a number of reps from pretty conservative areas. They didn't run on impeaching Bush or ending the war overnight.

There is not broad consensus in the US about what to do about Iraq. I think the compromise legislation mirrors the most recognizable consensus there is.

[Dhalgren]

16. That's what the anti-war movement is all about. When people who are

ardently anti-war agree to vote for a politician because that politician says he/she will work to end the war, then that anti-war voter wants the politician to do just that. If the politician doesn't, that voter may go elsewhere next time - and should. Any Democrat who says the Party winning the next election is more important than the welfare of the country, is no better than than the congressional Bush-bots we have been fighting against for all these years. We can disagree on what is best for the country, but that is where votes are gained and lost and that should be clear to everyone engaged at this point in our nation's history.

[mondo joe]

20. But the anti-war movement didn't elect congress. A plurality of Americans did.

And if the anti war movement thinks it will do better with a Republican candidate than a democrat willing to set a timeline, good luck to them.

[Dhalgren]

22. And good luck to the Democrats if the anti-war movement goes elsewhere...

[mondo joe]

24. The most hardcore activists don't represent the mainstream, which

is a far greater percentage of the vote.

And the current compromise is reflective of the most broad consensus we've got.

PS: We've already seen what happens when the most far left pull out - it's called Bush v Gore. Who didthat hurt more, Gore or everyone else?

[Dhalgren]

29. Sure it hurt the Democrats and everyone else. Makes you wish the Dems had listened...

[mondo joe]

30. That's one way to look at it. Another would be to wish that those who said

there was no difference between Bush and Gore would have opened their eyes.

I'd make the same wish right now. There's a difference in Congress between the repubs, who want no oversight or limit on Bush whatsoever, and the democratic compromise.

[Pierre.Suave]

25. Bullshit

the dems are doing nothing to end this, and are displaying their only concern is re-election.

[Glorfindel]

2. The Democrats are afraid of being accused of "not supporting the troops"

They need to become brave enough to declare that truly supporting the troops would be to bring them home so that not one more drop of American blood is wasted in the sands of Iraq. If politics is truly "the art of the possible," then congress could pass a declaration of victory in Iraq, pointing out that Saddam Hussein is gone, there are no weapons of mass destruction, etc. Hold a victory parade - let B*shit lead it riding a white horse down Pennsylvania Avenue yelling, "Yee-haw!" It's no tackier than his "mission accomplished" stunt on the aircraft carrier.

[TahitiNut]

12. The "politics of fear" has reigned supreme for many years.

What's even more disgusting is when those who show the courage to speak out are attacked by their own
'side.'

[Pierre.Suave]

26. Thats not a bad idea

"congress could pass a declaration of victory in Iraq"

Now thats a good idea, I think that would be fun to watch if nothing else.

[mondo joe]

3. Silly. How Zinn, of all people, or anyone on DU could pretend to not think POLITICALLY

is just a bad joke.

And abolitionists didn't wage the civil war - Lincoln did. And his stated reason was to save the union, not to end slavery.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

4. And, he issued the Emancipation Proclamation under pressure from the Abolitionists.

[mondo joe]

14. And Frederick Douglass broke with the "radical" abolitionists to support Lincoln.

Douglass saw the opportunity for progress with a chance of victory.

[Dhalgren]

6. The point was that the abolitionists did not relent for political reasons.

Lincoln did put a stop to the secessions, but the secessions were carried out because the abolitionists would never yield nor compromise.

[mondo joe]

8. Nor did they stage a sit-in in Lincolns office saying he betrayed them by fighting the

civil war to save the union.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

13. William Lloyd Garrison attacked Lincoln ceaselessly.

Frederick Douglass railed against him. He was bombarded with letters and newspaper columns relentlessly for his timidity in freeing the slaves.

He was also attacked by the "Radical Republicans" who demanded more from him regarding the freeing of the slaves and guaranteeing their freedom:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abraham_Lincoln

Reconstruction

Reconstruction began during the war as Lincoln and his associates pondered the questions of how to reintegrate the Southern states back into the Union, and what to do with Confederate leaders and with the freed slaves. Lincoln was the leader of the "moderates" regarding Reconstruction policy, and usually was opposed by the Radical Republicans led by Thaddeus Stevens in the House and Charles Sumner and Benjamin Wade in the Senate (though he cooperated with those men on most other issues). Lincoln was determined to find a course that would reunite the nation as soon as possible and not permanently alienate the Southerners, and throughout the war Lincoln urged speedy elections under generous terms in areas behind Union lines. Critical decisions had to be made during the war, as state after state was reconquered. Of special importance were Tennessee, where Lincoln appointed Andrew Johnson as governor, and Louisiana where Lincoln tried a plan that would restore the state when 10% of the voters agreed. The Radicals thought that policy was too lenient, and passed their own plan, the Wade-Davis Bill in 1864. Lincoln vetoed Wade-Davis, and the Radicals retaliated by refusing to seat representatives elected from Louisiana, Arkansas, and Tennessee.

[mondo joe]

15. Frederick Douglass knew better. NT

[Dhalgren]

17. A reasonable compromise is always acceptable, Zinn says as much in his piece.

And whenever a group dedicated to a particular moral or ethical movement makes a compromise, they must be sure that that compromise forwards their beliefs and the attainment of their ends. Bush, himself has said that the next President can withdraw the troops from Iraq - he won't. So the Democratic "compromise" of setting a date to begin withdrawals of September '08, is exactly in line with Bush's own plans. This is the "compromise"? And in the mean time hundreds more are killed and maimed each day and we pat ourselves on the back for a strategy for more wins in '08...

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

18. Frederick Douglass held Lincoln's feet to the fire throughout the war.

He constantly fought for the abolition movement and demanded that Lincoln acknowledge that the war was for freedom of the slaves - not to "save the union".

[mondo joe]

19. Douglass supported Lincoln - he didn't accuse Lincoln of betrayal.

Some could benefit from his example.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

7. Just trust the bosses. Please don't mention it gives Bush more money for the war.

It upsets the people who want the war ended - not funded.

[Dhalgren]

10. The point in all of this that many "Democratic Party First" people do not want to

talk about is that the anti-war movement is not Democratic. Many anti-war people are Democratic Party members and these people feel pulled in different directions by their Party's approach to the war. But the anti-war movement belongs to no political party and the Democrats need to remember that...

[bonito]

11. If bush signs that bill as it stands

my bet along with it signing statments as well, he will be hailed as conceding to the democrats by his talking machines crossing the divide on the war further advancing thier pnac adjenda.

[EFerrari]

23. Barbara Lee wants language in there to prohibit any of those funds

to be used to "pre emptively" attack Iran. It looks like that's what progressives in Congress are working on now.

[EFerrari]

21. K&R. Howard Zinn, right as usual. n/t

[Pierre.Suave]

27. thanks for the rec

I appreciate knowing that I posted something on DU worth a rec.

And, yes Howard Zinn nails it, once again.

[EFerrari]

28. Kick for jasonc and for Howard Zinn.

:kick:

[Jcrowley]

31. K&R n/t